295lbs ft but 1600kg to haul around...

When are you going to buy that Exige btw?? It's been 5 years of threatening :D

Torque numbers are largely meaningless, as you need to take gearing into account. If you have 9k revs vs 4.5k revs, you only need half the torques for similar acceleration. (Simplified argument).

I’d argue they are relevant if you want to pootle about not changing gear much, i suppose its about perspective, the c63 has a lot more torque but only a minimal power advantage considering its >50% greater displacement. The s65 has a very flat torque curve (and revs to 8.4k)

anyway.. maybe next year Mark.. i need to take some time out and shift a few cars depending on how the missus’s bad back improves or not..

i dont use a car daily other than the school run so in theory anything fits but we are planning on a bit of development on the house so if we do that i’ll go down to one car for a bit (store or flog t’others)..

I had one for a 1.5 years ..... same as all the above really . I bought it as a weekend /fun car and to be honest it was an absolute blast but just too big and heavy to really get you excited . A very capable car and on the road had to be doing silly speeds to get a thrill .... and for me that was my issue with it , just not fun at normal speeds . I had a 13 plate comp pack and wouldn’t like to run one with out Bmw warranty ... which is around £90 a month !

Ho Lee Shi'. [/Racist]

That's about the depreciation on my Regendo!

The torque thing annoys me

It was especially irritating when it was the default neg about the S2000

Which was/is about the last car on the planet where you should be expecting a surge of acceleration at low speeds in high gears

I have NEVER driven a car that I felt 'lacked torque'

If people find it a hardship to change gear they should drive an auto

Having said all that, 300lb ft is a bit weedy ;)

Fook me how much do you want? What does that massive jag have? S65 has double the S2k torque and ‘only’ weighs c33% more (i’m not suggesting its as good an engine, it plainly isnt)

get a diesel if torque is your thang. Niether interest me

I’ve run an M3 for 5.5 years, 3.5 without warranty so that’s £3k in the bank to fix shit after my TA fix.. its behaved but it doesnt see a lot of use atm

The thing is with the dct box if you want lazy driving you just stamp your foot down and it'll change gear and scream high up in the revs and there's your torque

You don't really notice the 'lack' of torque in the lower revs unless you're in manual mode and try to floor it while being in the wrong gear.

I think it's the perfect car for commuting and the euro trips you're planning will be awesome too.

I've only done 2 trackdays in mine, it's fast and fun but like above it doesn't compare to a proper track car, but then no fast 'normal' car is going to do that I think because of the weight. It does come alive when it all gets nice and hot.

Also depends what track you go to, I enjoyed bedford more than I did brands, spa would be awesome in it I think

:LOL:

The V12 has about 350lb ft (330 or summat bhp)
The 4.2 STR about 400 (and virtually identical bhp) - 'charged tho

I'm ok with manufacturer extended warranties. Good experiences with Ford, BMW, Honda amongst others and view the outlay as a normal part of the running costs. Wouldn't touch the third party stuff with barge pole.

I've done the fighting fund thing too. That gives you a gambler's chance of coming out on top but I like the convenience that comes with the mw.

The new (turbo) M3 has a lot of torque and it took BMW until quite recently to make it any good.

I think that has 400 ish and overwhelmed the traction of rwd constantly (i guess it arrives in a bit of a lump).

For me 300 makes this car very tractable without turning it into a c63 (c500?) which is a bit of a parody imho

it has faults, as win says though its an accomplished daily